Difference between revisions of "Urim VeTummim/2"
m |
|||
Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
<mekorot><multilink><a href="TargumPseudo-JonathanShemot28-30" data-aht="source">Targum Yerushalmi (Yonatan)</a><a href="TargumPseudo-JonathanShemot28-30" data-aht="source">Shemot 28:30</a><a href="Targum Yerushalmi (Yonatan)" data-aht="parshan">About Targum Yerushalmi (Yonatan)</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RashiShemot28-30" data-aht="source">Rashi</a><a href="RashiShemot28-30" data-aht="source">Shemot 28:30</a><a href="R. Shelomo Yitzchaki (Rashi)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RambanShemot28-30" data-aht="source">Ramban</a><a href="RambanShemot28-30" data-aht="source">Shemot 28:30</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Nachman (Ramban, Nachmanides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Nachman</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RalbagShemotBeurHaMilot28-30" data-aht="source">Ralbag</a><a href="RalbagShemotBeurHaMilot28-30" data-aht="source">Shemot Beur HaMilot 28:30</a><a href="R. Levi b. Gershom (Ralbag, Gersonides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Levi b. Gershom</a></multilink> #1,<fn>Ralbag raises several possible understandings of the Urim and Tummim. His preferred option is to view them as astrological signs (see below).</fn> <multilink><a href="AbarbanelShemot28-6" data-aht="source">Abarbanel</a><a href="AbarbanelShemot28-6" data-aht="source">Shemot 28:6</a><a href="R. Yitzchak Abarbanel" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel</a></multilink></mekorot> | <mekorot><multilink><a href="TargumPseudo-JonathanShemot28-30" data-aht="source">Targum Yerushalmi (Yonatan)</a><a href="TargumPseudo-JonathanShemot28-30" data-aht="source">Shemot 28:30</a><a href="Targum Yerushalmi (Yonatan)" data-aht="parshan">About Targum Yerushalmi (Yonatan)</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RashiShemot28-30" data-aht="source">Rashi</a><a href="RashiShemot28-30" data-aht="source">Shemot 28:30</a><a href="R. Shelomo Yitzchaki (Rashi)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RambanShemot28-30" data-aht="source">Ramban</a><a href="RambanShemot28-30" data-aht="source">Shemot 28:30</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Nachman (Ramban, Nachmanides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Nachman</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RalbagShemotBeurHaMilot28-30" data-aht="source">Ralbag</a><a href="RalbagShemotBeurHaMilot28-30" data-aht="source">Shemot Beur HaMilot 28:30</a><a href="R. Levi b. Gershom (Ralbag, Gersonides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Levi b. Gershom</a></multilink> #1,<fn>Ralbag raises several possible understandings of the Urim and Tummim. His preferred option is to view them as astrological signs (see below).</fn> <multilink><a href="AbarbanelShemot28-6" data-aht="source">Abarbanel</a><a href="AbarbanelShemot28-6" data-aht="source">Shemot 28:6</a><a href="R. Yitzchak Abarbanel" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel</a></multilink></mekorot> | ||
<point><b>No description in Shemot 28 and no execution in Shemot 39</b> – Ramban points to these omissions as support for this approach, explaining that since the Urim and Tummim were an inscription of the Divine name and not the work of artisans or the product of Israelite donations, it is logical that there is no command and no description of their creation. He posits that either Moshe himself wrote the name via Divine secret, or that the inscription was heavenly made.</point> | <point><b>No description in Shemot 28 and no execution in Shemot 39</b> – Ramban points to these omissions as support for this approach, explaining that since the Urim and Tummim were an inscription of the Divine name and not the work of artisans or the product of Israelite donations, it is logical that there is no command and no description of their creation. He posits that either Moshe himself wrote the name via Divine secret, or that the inscription was heavenly made.</point> | ||
− | <point><b>Definite article</b> – Ramban points to this as further proof of his position, suggesting that the Urim and Tummim are referred to with a definite article, as "the" Urim and Tummim, due to their holy status and/or Divine creation.<fn>He compares it to the description of the cherubs who were placed to guard the Garden of Eden | + | <point><b>Definite article</b> – Ramban points to this as further proof of his position, suggesting that the Urim and Tummim are referred to with a definite article, as "the" Urim and Tummim, due to their holy status and/or Divine creation.<fn>He compares it to the description of the cherubs who were placed to guard the Garden of Eden; they are similarly referred to as "the" cherubs even though they had not been mentioned earlier.</fn></point> |
<point><b>"וַיִּתֵּן אֶל הַחֹשֶׁן אֶת הָאוּרִים וְאֶת הַתֻּמִּים" (Vayikra 8:8)</b> – Ralbag and Abarbanel note that this verse, too, supports this approach, for it implies that Moshe placed a distinct object into the Choshen. The fact that the Choshen was folded over to form a pocket<fn>See Rashbam on 28:16.</fn>  further suggests that it was meant to hold something (and not simply serve as a backing for the Choshen stones, as per the position below).</point> | <point><b>"וַיִּתֵּן אֶל הַחֹשֶׁן אֶת הָאוּרִים וְאֶת הַתֻּמִּים" (Vayikra 8:8)</b> – Ralbag and Abarbanel note that this verse, too, supports this approach, for it implies that Moshe placed a distinct object into the Choshen. The fact that the Choshen was folded over to form a pocket<fn>See Rashbam on 28:16.</fn>  further suggests that it was meant to hold something (and not simply serve as a backing for the Choshen stones, as per the position below).</point> | ||
<point><b>How did the divination work?</b><ul> | <point><b>How did the divination work?</b><ul> | ||
Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
<point><b>Relationship between Urim and Tummim</b> – According to most of these sources, who posit that the inscription contained just the proper name of Hashem, there is no difference between the Urim and Tummim and it constitutes but one object. However, according to Ramban, who maintains that each of the Urim and Tummim refers to different names of Hashem, the two are distinct. Nonetheless, it seems that even Ramban might agree that in those cases where the text refers only to the "Urim", it  is simply a shortened formulation for "Urim and Tummim" (and does not refer to the Urim alone).</point> | <point><b>Relationship between Urim and Tummim</b> – According to most of these sources, who posit that the inscription contained just the proper name of Hashem, there is no difference between the Urim and Tummim and it constitutes but one object. However, according to Ramban, who maintains that each of the Urim and Tummim refers to different names of Hashem, the two are distinct. Nonetheless, it seems that even Ramban might agree that in those cases where the text refers only to the "Urim", it  is simply a shortened formulation for "Urim and Tummim" (and does not refer to the Urim alone).</point> | ||
<point><b>Relationship between 28:29 and 28:30</b> – These sources might suggest that each verse is focusing on a different part of the Choshen, as each had a different role. The names on the stones were meant to be a memorial, while the Urim and Tummim were for judgment and determination. The similarity in language stems only from the fact that both were connected to the Choshen and worn on the heart.</point> | <point><b>Relationship between 28:29 and 28:30</b> – These sources might suggest that each verse is focusing on a different part of the Choshen, as each had a different role. The names on the stones were meant to be a memorial, while the Urim and Tummim were for judgment and determination. The similarity in language stems only from the fact that both were connected to the Choshen and worn on the heart.</point> | ||
− | <point><b> | + | <point><b>Ephod</b> – Ramban suggests that the secrets of the Urim and Tummim and its Divine names might have been passed on to the learned scholars of Israel. Thus, others besides the priest might have made Ephods with a Choshen and Divine names similar to that made by Moshe, and used them periodically to consult with God</point> |
<point><b>Use in Second Temple period</b> – Abarbanel suggests that the Urim and Tummim were not in use during the Second Temple period because by then the inscriptions of the Divine name that Moshe had inserted into the Choshen had been lost.  As it was the essence of the Urim and Tummim, without it, divination was no longer possible.<fn>Though they could recreate the other priestly garments and the breastplate, they could not recreate the inscription.</fn></point> | <point><b>Use in Second Temple period</b> – Abarbanel suggests that the Urim and Tummim were not in use during the Second Temple period because by then the inscriptions of the Divine name that Moshe had inserted into the Choshen had been lost.  As it was the essence of the Urim and Tummim, without it, divination was no longer possible.<fn>Though they could recreate the other priestly garments and the breastplate, they could not recreate the inscription.</fn></point> | ||
</category> | </category> | ||
Line 60: | Line 60: | ||
<point><b>No description in Shemot 28 and no execution in Shemot 39</b> – Ramban questions this approach, noting that if the objects were made of gold and silver, as claimed by Ibn Ezra, then they required skilled craftsmanship and the manner of their creation should have been described.  Ibn Ezra might respond that the secrets of the celestial spheres were not known to the artisans and thus only Moshe could form the Urim and Tummim. As such, there was no need to describe them in the commands to the craftsmen.</point> | <point><b>No description in Shemot 28 and no execution in Shemot 39</b> – Ramban questions this approach, noting that if the objects were made of gold and silver, as claimed by Ibn Ezra, then they required skilled craftsmanship and the manner of their creation should have been described.  Ibn Ezra might respond that the secrets of the celestial spheres were not known to the artisans and thus only Moshe could form the Urim and Tummim. As such, there was no need to describe them in the commands to the craftsmen.</point> | ||
<point><b>Definite article</b> – It is not clear why the Urim and Tummim are referred to with a definite article.</point> | <point><b>Definite article</b> – It is not clear why the Urim and Tummim are referred to with a definite article.</point> | ||
− | <point><b>Color of the robe of the | + | <point><b>Color of the robe of the Ephod</b> – Ralbag notes that the robe upon which the Ephod and Choshen with the Urim and Tummim rested was sky blue, supporting this position that all was supposed to allude to the celestial spheres.</point> |
− | <point><b>Divining via the | + | <point><b>Divining via the Ephod</b> – Ibn Ezra suggests that others might have made Ephods similar to that made by Moshe and even though they did not include the original Urim and Tummim, if the priest was familiar with the Urim and Tummim made by Moshe, he might imagine it and be able to respond to a questioner with the Ephod alone.</point> |
</category> | </category> | ||
<category>Lottery | <category>Lottery | ||
Line 77: | Line 77: | ||
<p>The Urim and Tummim were two objects which served as lots, one representing a positive response and the other a negative one (or one representing one possible outcome and the other its alternative).</p> | <p>The Urim and Tummim were two objects which served as lots, one representing a positive response and the other a negative one (or one representing one possible outcome and the other its alternative).</p> | ||
<mekorot>several modern scholars<fn>For a list of scholars who view the Urim and Tummim as lots see C.V Dam, The Urim and Thummim: A Means of Revelation in Ancient Israel, (Indiana, 1997): 37-36 and notes 121-124 there. The scholars mentioned disagree as to the nature of the lot, some viewing it as a binary lot and others as more complicated. For several 20th century sources who view it as a binary lot, see N. H. Tur Sinai, אורים ותומים, Encylopedia Mikrait I 179-182 and U. Cassuto on Shemot 28:30.</fn></mekorot> | <mekorot>several modern scholars<fn>For a list of scholars who view the Urim and Tummim as lots see C.V Dam, The Urim and Thummim: A Means of Revelation in Ancient Israel, (Indiana, 1997): 37-36 and notes 121-124 there. The scholars mentioned disagree as to the nature of the lot, some viewing it as a binary lot and others as more complicated. For several 20th century sources who view it as a binary lot, see N. H. Tur Sinai, אורים ותומים, Encylopedia Mikrait I 179-182 and U. Cassuto on Shemot 28:30.</fn></mekorot> | ||
− | <point><b>Biblical evidence</b> – U. Cassuto points to <a href="ShemuelI14-38-42" data-aht="source">Shemuel I 14:38-42</a> as support for this approach. Shaul says, "הָבָה תָמִים", understood to be an allusion to the Urim and Tummim,<fn>See <multilink><a href="RAvrahambHaRambamShemot28-30" data-aht="source">R. Avraham b. HaRambam</a><a href="RAvrahambHaRambamShemot28-30" data-aht="source">Shemot 28:30</a><a href="R. Avraham Maimonides" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham Maimonides</a></multilink> who reads it this way. Many traditional commentators, however, appear to assume that the verse might refer to a regular lottery and that Shaul was not asking to bring the Urim and Tummim but requesting of Hashem that the lot he cast be true.</fn> but then the verses appear to describe a lottery, employing language such as "לכד and "נפל", elsewhere connected to lots being cast.<fn>See, for example, Yeshayahu 34:17, Yonah 1:7, Esther 3:7 or Nechemyah 10:35 where the root "נפל" is explicitly related to the noun "גורל". See also Yehoshua 7:14-16 and Shemuel I 10:20-21 where "לכד" is used in the context of a lottery (though the word "גורל" does not appear).</fn> Cassuto further notes that a survey of the other verses in which the Urim and Tummim or the | + | <point><b>Biblical evidence</b> – U. Cassuto points to <a href="ShemuelI14-38-42" data-aht="source">Shemuel I 14:38-42</a> as support for this approach. Shaul says, "הָבָה תָמִים", understood to be an allusion to the Urim and Tummim,<fn>See <multilink><a href="RAvrahambHaRambamShemot28-30" data-aht="source">R. Avraham b. HaRambam</a><a href="RAvrahambHaRambamShemot28-30" data-aht="source">Shemot 28:30</a><a href="R. Avraham Maimonides" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham Maimonides</a></multilink> who reads it this way. Many traditional commentators, however, appear to assume that the verse might refer to a regular lottery and that Shaul was not asking to bring the Urim and Tummim but requesting of Hashem that the lot he cast be true.</fn> but then the verses appear to describe a lottery, employing language such as "לכד and "נפל", elsewhere connected to lots being cast.<fn>See, for example, Yeshayahu 34:17, Yonah 1:7, Esther 3:7 or Nechemyah 10:35 where the root "נפל" is explicitly related to the noun "גורל". See also Yehoshua 7:14-16 and Shemuel I 10:20-21 where "לכד" is used in the context of a lottery (though the word "גורל" does not appear).</fn> Cassuto further notes that a survey of the other verses in which the Urim and Tummim or the Ephod<fn>He assumes that in these verses too, one asked via the Urim and Tummim which were on the Ephod. See <a href="Bemidbar27-18-21" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 27:18-21</a>, <a href="ShemuelI23-9-12" data-aht="source">Shemuel I 23:9-12</a> and <a href="ShemuelI30-7-8" data-aht="source">Shemuel I 30:7-8</a>.  In each case, the questioner asks whether or not to go to battle, and whether or not he will be victorious.  All require only a yes or no answer.</fn> are consulted shows that queries were always worded in a way which left only two possible answers,<fn>Questions could be answered with either a "yes" or "no", or a first or second possibility etc. He further notes that only one question could be answered at a time (see <a href="ShemuelI23-9-12" data-aht="source">Shemuel I 23:9-12</a>). This, too, can be explained if one posits that the response was of a binary nature.</fn> supporting the theory that the divination involved a binary lottery.</point> |
<point><b>Septuagint</b> – Several modern scholars<fn>See above note.</fn> support this approach by turning to the Septuagint's version of <a href="ShemuelI14-38-42" data-aht="source">Shemuel I 14:41</a>, which expands upon the Masoretic text and reads: וַיֹּאמֶר שָׁאוּל אֶל-יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל למה לא ענית את עבדך היום אם יש בי או ביונתן בני העון הזה ‎ה' אלהי ישראל הבה אורים ואם ישנו העון הזה בעמך ישראל הָבָה תָמִים.‎<fn>They assume that the Septuagint preserves a more original form and that a mistake fell into the Masoretic text when a copyist accidentally omitted several words in the middle of the verse, his eye skipping from the word "יִשְׂרָאֵל" in the beginning of the verse to the "יִשְׂרָאֵל" at the end (a case of haplography). However, even if one does not want to posit that a mistake fell into the Masoretic text and assumes that it is the original, one can still turn to the Septuagint as a possible understanding of the intent of the verses.</fn> In the Septuagint, Shaul appears to be suggesting that if he and Yonatan are guilty the "ארים" lot should fall to them, whereas if they are innocent (and the nation guilty), the "תמים" lot would instead fall to them.</point> | <point><b>Septuagint</b> – Several modern scholars<fn>See above note.</fn> support this approach by turning to the Septuagint's version of <a href="ShemuelI14-38-42" data-aht="source">Shemuel I 14:41</a>, which expands upon the Masoretic text and reads: וַיֹּאמֶר שָׁאוּל אֶל-יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל למה לא ענית את עבדך היום אם יש בי או ביונתן בני העון הזה ‎ה' אלהי ישראל הבה אורים ואם ישנו העון הזה בעמך ישראל הָבָה תָמִים.‎<fn>They assume that the Septuagint preserves a more original form and that a mistake fell into the Masoretic text when a copyist accidentally omitted several words in the middle of the verse, his eye skipping from the word "יִשְׂרָאֵל" in the beginning of the verse to the "יִשְׂרָאֵל" at the end (a case of haplography). However, even if one does not want to posit that a mistake fell into the Masoretic text and assumes that it is the original, one can still turn to the Septuagint as a possible understanding of the intent of the verses.</fn> In the Septuagint, Shaul appears to be suggesting that if he and Yonatan are guilty the "ארים" lot should fall to them, whereas if they are innocent (and the nation guilty), the "תמים" lot would instead fall to them.</point> | ||
<point><b>Meaning of name</b> – In light of the Septuagint text, Tur Sinai<fn>See the article cited above.</fn> and others suggest that "אורים" might relate to the word "ארור" (cursed), connoting guilt or a negative outcome, and "תמים" to innocence, or a positive outcome.</point> | <point><b>Meaning of name</b> – In light of the Septuagint text, Tur Sinai<fn>See the article cited above.</fn> and others suggest that "אורים" might relate to the word "ארור" (cursed), connoting guilt or a negative outcome, and "תמים" to innocence, or a positive outcome.</point> |
Version as of 00:52, 10 February 2022
Urim VeTummim
Exegetical Approaches
Name of Hashem
The Urim and Tummim were an inscription of the proper name of Hashem (or perhaps several names of Hashem) inserted into the folds of the Choshen.
- Spell out message – Ramban suggests that when asked a question, the power from the Divine names of the Urim caused certain letters from the names on the Choshen stones to be illuminated.4 These, though, appeared simultaneously and were not in order, and so other Divine names from the Tummim inspired the priest so he would correctly arrange them to form a word.5 Abarbanel, instead, suggests that Hashem's name caused the letters to be illuminated one by one, so that the message spelled itself.6
- Inspire prophecy – Ralbag, instead, suggests that focusing on the Divine name in the Urim and Tummim helped the priest attain prophecy. It was this prophecy alone which allowed him to answer the question posed. [According to him, nothing on the Choshen was illuminated or protruded, so nothing about the Urim and Tummim was supernatural or could be mistaken for magic.]
- Purpose – Targum Yonatan maintains that the name derives from their function, with Urim, related to אור (light), referring to how they illuminated Israel, telling them how to act, and Tummim, from "תם" (complete), referring to the fact that the predictions made were always fulfilled.
- Technique – Ramban, alternatively, suggests that the name refers to the techniques by which the divination occurred. The Urim relates to the shining of the letters and Tummim to the perfection given to the priest which enabled him to unscramble the letters to form a message.
Choshen Stones
The Urim and Tummim are identified with the stones of the Choshen on which were engraved the names of the tribes.
- Rav Shrira Gaon suggests that the additional name is simply a sign of praise, highlighting the unique and important nature of the object.
- It is also possible that the Urim and Tummim is the name given to the entire framework of twelve stones in their gold settings. The Choshen, in contrast, referred to the multicolored woven fabric, or perhaps to the fabric together with the framework of stones, while the stones themselves each have individual names.
- Prophecy – According to Rambam,14 when asked a question, the priest would get divine inspiration, look at the Choshen, and via prophecy see certain letters from the engraved names protrude to spell a reply.15 According to him, the letters on the stones themselves did not physically shine or pop out and there was no supernatural component to the Choshen. It merely facilitated prophecy.16
- Illumination – Josephus, in contrast, implies that the stones might not have been used for general questions but only to foretell victory in battle. He suggests that when heading towards war, the stones would shine brightly to indicate that Hashem's presence was within the nation. One might also suggest, as above, that when asked a question, various letters in the stones were illuminated to spell a response.
Astrological Signs
The Urim and Tummim referred to forms of various astrological objects, such as the stars and constellations.
- Ibn Ezra is intentionally obscure but claims that the Urim were made of gold and silver, perhaps implying that one was meant to represent the sun and the other the moon.17 He further alludes to the twelve constellations,18 perhaps what he thinks the Tummim represented. As such, it seems that according to him, the Urim and Tummin might have functioned as a sort of astrolabe, a model of the celestial spheres.
- Ralbag explains similarly, explicitly suggesting that the Urim refer to images of the stars, while the Tummim refer to forms of other celestial objects and their movers, including their prime mover, Hashem. According to him, then, the latter were presumably alluded to via some type of writing and not via a physical image.
Lottery
The Urim and Tummim functioned as a lottery. This opinion subdivides regarding the lottery dynamics:
Alphabet
The Urim and Tummim consisted of small pieces of wood or metal on which were inscribed the letters of the alphabet. When drawn randomly from the Choshen they would form words.
Binary Lots
The Urim and Tummim were two objects which served as lots, one representing a positive response and the other a negative one (or one representing one possible outcome and the other its alternative).
Borders
In addition to their divining function, the Urim and Tummim contained a list of the borders of the tribal inheritances.